What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessees had filed the necessary forms under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and received Form No. 3. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

A batch of 20 appeals were filed by various assessees and the Revenue. During the hearing, the assessees expressed their intention to settle the disputes under the Direct Taxes ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020'.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the pendency of appeals when the assessees opted to settle their tax disputes through the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

T M Subramaniam Represented by T… vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHAShri D. Sundararajan, Shri Babu Manoharan,

Hearing: 27.01.2021Pronounced: 27.01.2021

आदेश /O R D E R Per MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This bunch of 20 appeals filed by different assessees and Revenue are directed against respective orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai for respective assessment years.

4 & 19 Others (VSVS) 2. We have heard the counsels for the assessees and the ld. DR and also perused the material available on record. At the time of hearing, learned counsels for the assessees have made a statement at bar that the assessees wants to utilize the Direct Taxes ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ to settle pending dispute relating to Direct Taxes and in this regard the assessees have filed Form No 1 and 2 and received Form No. 3 from the designated authority. Therefore, once the assessees received Form No.3 from the designated authority, then there is no point in keeping appeals filed by the assessees. Hence, we dismiss the appeals filed by the assessees and Revenue as withdrawn.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees and Revenue are dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27th January, 2021 at Chennai.

T M SUBRAMANIAM REPRESENTED BY T M SIVAKUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 1 (1), CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments